Papers › What Is Missing In Homophily? Disentangling Graph Homophily For Graph Neural Networks
What Is Missing In Homophily? Disentangling Graph Homophily For Graph Neural Networks
Yilun Zheng, Sitao Luan, Lihui Chen
Graph homophily refers to the phenomenon that connected nodes tend to share similar characteristics. Understanding this concept and its related metrics is crucial for designing effective Graph Neural Networks (GNNs). The most widely used homophily metrics, such as edge or node homophily, quantify such "similarity" as label consistency across the graph topology. These metrics are believed to be able to reflect the performance of GNNs, especially on node-level tasks. However, many recent studies have empirically demonstrated that the performance of GNNs does not always align with homophily metrics, and how homophily influences GNNs still remains unclear and controversial. Then, a crucial question arises: What is missing in our current understanding of homophily? To figure out the missing part, in this paper, we disentangle the graph homophily into 3 aspects: label, structural, and feature homophily, providing a more comprehensive understanding of GNN performance. To investigate their synergy, we propose a Contextual Stochastic Block Model with 3 types of Homophily (CSBM-3H), where the topology and feature generation are controlled by the 3 metrics. Based on the theoretical analysis of CSBM-3H, we derive a new composite metric, named Tri-Hom, that considers all 3 aspects and overcomes the limitations of conventional homophily metrics. The theoretical conclusions and the effectiveness of Tri-Hom have been verified through synthetic experiments on CSBM-3H. In addition, we conduct experiments on 31 real-world benchmark datasets and calculate the correlations between homophily metrics and model performance. Tri-Hom has significantly higher correlation values than 17 existing metrics that only focus on a single homophily aspect, demonstrating its superiority and the importance of homophily synergy. Our code is available at \url{https://github.com/zylMozart/Disentangle_GraphHom}.
In Syntology View this paper on Syntology: its repositories, every harvested function with whether it ran, its licence and the call to fetch it.
Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2406.18854")
Code
Syntology Ran 10 of 11 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 1 has no recorded run. Of those that ran: 1 ran · honoured contract; 9 ran with no contract checked.
By repository: official repository: 11 samples from 1 repository, 10 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
11 samples harvested; 10 ran; 1 honoured the contract we drafted; 1 has no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-25; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 0 of the 11 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from zylmozart/disentangle_graphhom. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
6c070d8d3769da17 · report
95ad75b3e583df53 · report
bf40f9371cf13ba1 · report
aaa80033faca2aeb · report
7864a49a3e2da4fd · report
6784eb2b1dbf4455 · report
ef90ba6dacfae5eb · report
6f63e8ed588c5c47 · report
ad582bcf67eada8c · report
d8014340a3d1f330 · report
0b2b4a99abaf17f1 · report
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Methods
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections